he coach who lifted the University of Massachusetts
men's basketball program to unprecedented heights said
the inability to sustain such prominence is not Bruiser
Flint's fault.

Instead, John Calipari said flagging support by the
administration and state legislature has left Flint and
athletic director Bob Marcum with the task of trying to
retain a level of national success, without the resources
to do so.

"My question is whether they're still committed to the
level they were when I was there," said Calipari, who
took UMass to the 1996 Final Four. "What has been
done since I left?"

Yesterday, Calipari, an assistant coach with the
Philadelphia 76ers, stoutly defended not only Flint but
UMass athletic director Bob Marcum.

"If they listen to Bob, they'll get out of this," Calipari
said. "Bob Marcum is fine. Since he's been there,
UMass athletics have reached a different level.

"And Bruiser is taking undue heat," Calipari said. "He
can do the job — no question."

Sluggish attendance and erratic play have put a
microscope on Flint, Calipari's former assistant and
successor in 1996. Calipari says any school that thinks it
can compete at a national level, without a continued
commitment — including significant financial
investment — is deluding itself.

He thinks that's happened at UMass, and is upset that
Flint is being cast as the fall guy.

"Our success was not just about me," said Calipari, who
is exploring a return to college coaching elsewhere.
"Administrations win championships. People at UMass
have to recommit to the excellence of the program.

"You see an erosion of morale there," he said. "And
when people say it's because of one guy (Flint), that's
wrong."

Calipari said he enjoyed a special relationship with
former UMass president Michael Hooker, who he
credited for making sure the team enjoyed first-class
treatment in everything from recruiting budgets to travel
costs. Calipari insisted that anything less would have
caused UMass to lag behind more well-endowed
programs.

"Look at UConn," he said. "Jim Calhoun is a great
coach, but whether he stays or goes, everyone from their
state legislature to the board of trustees is absolutely
committed to that program. Why can't they commit like
that for UMass?

"When I was there, William Bulger (Hooker's successor)
and David Scott (the UMass-Amherst chancellor) were
committed to the program," Calipari said. "And Michael
Hooker — you knew where he was."

But while Calipari clearly considered Hooker the driving
force within the administration, Scott said last night that it
was his office, not Hooker's, that supervised the athletic
budget.

"He certainly supported the teams in a sense of cheering
for them, but I'm not aware of any programs that went
through his office, at least since I came in 1993," Scott
said. "The responsibilities were through my office, and
I'm not aware of any significant reductions in athletic
programs.

"We've invested very significantly in all our athletic
programs, including men's basketball," Scott said. "I'm
proud of what we've done — then and now."

Bulger could not be reached for comment.

Though Calipari didn't mention it, one example of the
limitations at UMass is a weight room which appears
cramped and inadequate, at least in comparison to some
schools UMass recruits against.

Calipari said what saddens him goes beyond his feeling
that Flint is being blamed for conditions beyond his
control. He says UMass has frittered away its national
basketball reputation because once it reached the top, it
disregarded what was required to stay there.

"I love the place, but no university can do it with
mirrors," he said. "UMass has to decide what it wants,
because you can't spend half as much as UConn does,
and then think you'll be able to compete with them."